DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D: Distribution authorized to the DoD and DoD contractors only; Software documentation date: 30 Jun 03; Other requests for this data should be referred to Precision Fires Rocket and Missile Systems Project Office, SFAE-MSLS-PF-PDT, Redstone Arsenal, AL. EXPORT-CONTROL ACT WARNING: WARNING- This document contains technical data whose export is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C., Sec. 2751 et seq) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (Title 50, U.S.C., App. 2401 et seq). Violations of these export laws are subject to severe criminal penalties. Disseminate in accordance with provisions of DoD Directive 5230.25. Precision Fires Rocket and Missile Systems Presentation to Precision Strike Association Annual Review Fort Walton Beach, FL 11 March 2009 Precision Strike Association Recipients of the 2008 William J. Perry Award COL David J. J. Rice Project Manager Precision Fires Rocket and Missile Systems Phone (256) 876-1196 (DSN 746) Email: david.rice@msl.army.mil Page 1
PFRMS Systems at War M270A1 98% Readiness Rate All systems are supporting the Global War on Terrorism Currently supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom Performance is above Army Standards Launchers returning in excellent condition requiring only routine and minimal maintenance HIMARS 99% Readiness Rate GMLRS Unitary 1,124 Rockets Fired As of 5 Mar 09 98% Reliability ATACMS 543 Missiles Fired As of 10 Dec 09 98% Reliability Page 2
GMLRS-Unitary Rocket Usage in Theater 1,124 Total Rockets Fired As Of 5 Mar 2009 Who Shoots GMLRS-U: US Army 648 57.65% USMC 27 2.4% UK 449 39.95% M270A1 51% M142 12% M270B1 37% US Army Missions Who Requests GMLRS-U: Army 421 65% USMC 121 19% Other 106 16% How GMLRS-U is employed: Troops in Contact 183 28% Pre-Planned 465 72% Environments employed: Urban/COIN 619 96% Other (TD/Test) 29 4% Operationally Effective: 98.3% Capability Gap: Persistent, responsive, allweather, rapidly-deployable, long-range, surface-to-surface, precision-strike capability. Description GPS-Augmented Inertial Guidance 200lb-Class HE IM-Compliant Warhead Multi-Fuze Selection (Point Detonating, Delay, Proximity) 15-70km Range Current Targets Precisely Located/Mensurated Point targets Congested/Complex Urban Targets Targets in Areas Where Collateral Damage is of Concern Effectiveness/Reliability BDA Shows High Level of Effectiveness Rare Reports of Minor Collateral Damage Reliability of US Army Missions: 98.68% Page 3
ATACMS QRU Usage In Theater 543 Total Missiles Fired as of 10 Dec 2008 OIF/OEF MISSIONS Who uses ATACMS? Army 145 28% Marines Joint Operations 77 15% USAF 290 57% M270A1 50% How ATACMS is Employed: Time-Sensitive Targets 205 40% Pre-Planned 307 60% Employment Environments: Initial OIF Conflict 460 90% COIN 52* 10% *QRU & T2K Unitary Mission Process Target located by Multiple Sensors Target refined using Precision Strike Suite - Special Operation Forces or Mensuration via Rainstorm / Raindrop, etc. Passed to AFATDS for tactical fire control Launcher receives and executes mission M270 37% M142 13% Page 4
Launcher Theater Accomplishments All FAL variants (M270, M270A1, M270B1 and M142) have supported GWOT operations Launchers variants currently support both OIF and OEF operations 13 Army M142s support OIF / OEF 4 UK M270B1s support OEF 16 Army M270A1s support OIF 6 USMC M142s support OIF Launchers deployed in Theatre continue to perform above Army Standards Operational readiness exceeds 97% Reliability is over 350 hours between System Abort Failures No maintenance issues M142 and M270A1 launchers returning from both Theaters are in excellent condition requiring minimal Reset Page 5
MLRS Worldwide Third Party Sales MOU PARTNERS US Canada** {17} SLOVAKIA 26 1/ FINLAND (22) NORWAY (12) DENMARK (12) JORDAN** {18} SOUTH KOREA (48) [10] (A-220) UK PERU** {6} JAPAN (77) + [22] * FRANCE SINGAPORE {18} GERMANY UAE {20} (A-101) ITALY GREECE (36) (A-100) TURKEY (12) (A-71) 1/ I I RM-70 Modular Launchers / 810 M26 Rockets EGYPT (26) ISRAEL (48) BAHRAIN (9) + [6] (A-30) OMAN** {20} ** Potential (A) ATACMS { } HIMARS ( ) M270 [ ] M270A1 * Co-Production Page 6
The Future for Cluster Munitions Requirement: Suppress, neutralize, destroy various armored or soft, mobile or fixed, active or passive, precisely or imprecisely located, high-payoff area and point targets Cluster Munitions Policy Memo (19 Jun 08) - After 2018, cluster munitions must not produce >1% UXO; limit will not be waived - No differentiation between types of UXO (hazardous or non-hazardous duds) - All cluster munition stocks that exceed operational planning requirements will be removed from the inventory as soon as possible, but not later than Jun 09 Self Destruct Fuze (SDF) Development and Performance - Previous UXO Requirement: <2% 20-60km; <4% <20km and >60km Does not Comply with the new DOD Policy - GMLRS DPICM w/psdf demonstrated hazardous dud rate of only 0.15%, overall UXO 3.7%: Does not comply with the new DOD Policy In 2019, the Army will no longer have the ability to efficiently engage inaccurately located and area targets! Page 7
Number of Rockets >120 100 80 60 40 20 0 GMLRS DPICM ORD Target Engagements GMLRS DPICM in Full Rate Production, yet no longer deemed politically suitable Unacceptable rate of unexploded ordnance Long range radar accuracy is not adequate for efficient GMLRS unitary target engagements beyond cannon artillery ranges ORD Target #1 ORD Target #2 110 20 2 6 3 5 7 9 14 10m 50m 100m 150m 200m Target Location Error 250m Number of Rockets 16 12 8 4 0 ORD Target #3 Number of Rockets 5 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 >220 180 140 100 60 20 0 15 4 10m 25m 50m 75m 100m Target Location Error 200 36 25 30 24 14 6 8 10m 50m 100m 150m 200m Target Location Error DPICM Unitary Page 8
Inventory and Operational Risks Serviceable Rocket Inventory 2008-2019 Munition M26 (DPICM) M26A2 (DPICM) M30 (DPICM) 2008 Available munitions 360,192 3,924 1,914 Range 32.5km 45.0km 70.0km 2019 Available munitions 0 0 0 ZERO M31A1 (Unitary) 204 70.0km 33,006 Operational Risks GMLRS AWP production schedule may not provide sufficient numbers by 2019 to support COCOM operational plans AMSAA/ARL approved models for AWP technologies Page 9
Program Overview Program composition ACAT 1C with two variants DPICM in Full Rate Production (FRP) Unitary Completing LRIP headed to FRP Decision Variants share documentation APB Common Funding (RDTE and Procurement) Lines Second Order Effects Impact to APB Item C of Nunn-McCurdy ADM (April 2007) Future of DPICM Production Elimination of DPICM, impact on the USMC and FMS Customers Page 10
AWP Performance Parameters Meets DPICM ORD requirements in servicing targets Produce no residual cluster munition UXO Achieve required warhead IM rating Compatible with the M270A1 and HIMARS Launchers Page 11
GMLRS System Description Warhead Prox Sensor Radome M270A1 Electronic Safe & Arm Fuze (ESAF) Canards Battery Nose Cap Unitary Unique Components Control Actuatio n System Guidance Processor Electroni cs Electronic Safe & Arm Device (ESAD) Nose Cap TBD Spring Fins Roll Joint Motor GMLRS Common Components Payload Dispensing Core Assembly Sub-munitions Prox Sensor TBD DPICM Unique Components Fuze TBD Warhead HIMARS Alternative Warhead Unique Components Page 12
AWP Schedule Overview 3 th 1 st 2 rd 4 th 1 st 2 rd 4 th 1 st 2 rd 4 th 1 st 2 rd 4 th 1 st 2 rd 4 th 1 st 2 rd 4 th 1 st 2 rd FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 rd 4 nd 3 nd 3 nd 3 nd 3 nd 3 nd 3 nd 3 OND J FMAMJ JA SOND J FMAMJ JAS OND J FMAMJ JA SOND J FMAMJ JAS OND J FMAMJ JA S ONDJ FMAMJ JAS OND J FMAMJ JAS AMJ JAS FY16 1 st 2 nd 4 th OND J F Concept draft CDD Tech Development Outputs - Update AOA; TEMP - LFT&E Waiver Request - Affordability Assessment - System Performance Spec Tech Development - CARD; CCA - ICE; PESHE - POE; PPP - SEP; TRA - Update Cost & Manpower Estimate - Update Acquisition Plan & Strategy - Validate Sys. Spt. Maint. Obj. Requirements CDD AROC/JROC Validation & Approval SDD Design Readiness Review System Development and Demo System Development and Demonstration - Temp & Test Reports Outputs - Update AOA, APB - System Functional Specs - Risk Assessment - Affordability Assessment - APB, CARD, CCA - Initial Production Baseline - FCA, ICE, PESHE - Integrated Baseline Review - POE, POE, PPP - Demo Product Support Baseline - PRR, SEP, SVR - Product Support Strategy & Plan - TRA; TRR; - Performance Based Log Strategy - Update Acquisition Plan & Strategy CPD LRIP Low Rate Initial Production Outputs - Affordability Assessment, CARD & ICE - Product Support Package, CCA, - Final Production Baseline, PCA, & POE - Integrated Baseline Review & SEP - Update Cost & Manpower Estimate, & AOA - Implement Performance Based Log - Update Acquisition Plan & Strategy & APB - Economic Analysis - Test Reports, TEMP; OTRRS, & IOT&E FRP Design Review Deployment Configuration Steering Board Validates the Requirement, Technology Development Strategy, and Contracting Plan Agrees to Resource the AWP Confirms Compliance with the Prototyping Strategy G3 Directed Requirement CSB Warhead Approach MS-A Warhead Prototypes Current Focus RFP Prime Contractor Integration Tech AOA Demos Update 6 months MS-B Build test HW EDT PQT FRP-VIII Contract OMAR MS-C Milestone prep Execute IOT Mod FRP-IX LRIP Unitary FRP VIII Deliveries Test Article Delivery LUT PVT BLRIP SER Unitary FRP IX Deliveries FRP Decision MR IOC Warhead Approach (Concept Refinement) USG Approve Multiple Concepts to Prototype Mature Technology Development Strategy Perform Alternative System Review Staff Technology Development Strategy Page 13
Review of Eliminating DPICM Current psdf (nor DPICM) is not compliant with DoD cluster munition policy Must demilitarize all non-compliant DPICMs after 2018; cost TBD UAE DPICM Procurement in FRP 4 USMC Unexercised DPICM Option in FRP 4 Recommend Build Unitary in Lieu of DPICM FY09-FY13 Page 14
Questions? Page 15